Improving the product this quarter is one job. Being able to answer is a different job. The second one has a date on it, and it is the one you need.
You have to write back to somebody. It could be a procurement team, or your partner's legal counsel. Sometimes it is the customer who asked a question in a renewal thread. Sometimes an investor who wants to know what the product will look like before the money moves. There is a date attached. You know roughly what has to happen.
So you asked for design and accessibility work, because that is what it sounds like. Those four words cover five separate purchases here. They produce different documents, take different shapes, and only one of them ends with something you can send back.
The pair most often confused is testing work and conformance evidence. Ask who reads the output, and whether it carries a date. That is usually enough.
| Question | Testing and remediation | Conformance evidence |
|---|---|---|
| What it produces | Testing and remediationFindings, fixes, and a product that behaves better than it did. | Conformance evidenceA dated document. It names the views we tested, the WCAG version and level, the technologies relied upon, and the re-test result. |
| Who reads it | Testing and remediationYour own team. The output is a work queue. | Conformance evidenceSomebody outside your company. It leaves the building attached to your name. |
| Does it carry a date | Testing and remediationNo. It describes a practice, and a practice does not expire. | Conformance evidenceYes. The scope is written on its face, and so is when it was true. |
One thing worth knowing before you ask anybody for either: there is no certificate at the end. The Information Technology Industry Council publishes the VPAT template, and says plainly that there is no certification for VPAT. By its own account, the product owner completes it as a self-declaration. VPAT is a registered trademark of the Information Technology Industry Council, and nothing we produce is called one. W3C says its own conformance logos do not represent review or validation of conformance by W3C or WAI.
That sets the limit on what the dated document can be. Where a customer asks for an accessibility conformance report, the product owner signs it. That is you. We do not describe what we hand over as a WCAG conformance claim. The reason is W3C's own sentence about sampled evaluation, and every real audit samples: "in the majority of situations, using this methodology alone does not result in being able to make WCAG 2 conformance claims." What we hand over is the tested evidence that sits behind the document you sign.
That cuts both ways, and it cuts us too. We build for the audits. We do not own the certifications. We do not certify against specific compliance frameworks ourselves; our software engineers build systems that pass your auditors' requirements.
Five purchases
The tell is a live product with drop-out data you can read and a flow you can name. We find where the effort sits in that flow, remove it, then check the shipped build against the specification.
Needs a live flow and real numbers
UI and UX designThe tell is a technical doubt that nothing settles on a whiteboard, with nothing built yet. You get an answer to one decided question and a record of what was ruled out. You own the code from day one.
Plan on rebuilding what it proves
Product prototypingThe tell is many surfaces that have to stay consistent. Somebody's job is now keeping them that way. You get the shared parts the screens are built from and the written rules for changing them.
Not worth it on one surface
Design systemsThe tell is a product still to be built. It can also be a goal of changing how the building happens rather than producing a document. The product is built to WCAG 2.2 by default, and higher compliance targets are supported on request.
Changes how you build, not what you send
Accessibility testingThe tell is that somebody outside the company is going to read the output. You get a dated document naming views tested, WCAG version and level, technologies relied upon, and the re-test result.
Evidence with a date, not a certificate
WCAG and ADA complianceEach of these carries a scope. The scope is the part that decides whether it is yours.
| Instrument | Who it binds | What it covers |
|---|---|---|
| US DOJ 2024 Title II rule | Who it bindsUnited States, state and local government | What it coversWCAG 2.1 Level AA for state and local government web content and mobile apps. Deadlines are 26 April 2027 for entities serving 50,000 or more people, and 26 April 2028 below that threshold and for special districts. It binds public entities, not private businesses. |
| UK 2018 public sector regulations | Who it bindsUnited Kingdom, public sector | What it coversGOV.UK guidance states that meeting WCAG 2.2 Level AA meets the legal requirements. That applies to the UK public sector. |
| EN 301 549 V3.2.1 | Who it bindsEurope, procurement | What it coversPublished jointly by CEN, CENELEC and ETSI. Used in European public procurement. |
| Directive 2019/882 | Who it bindsEuropean Union, listed sectors | What it coversThe European Accessibility Act, covering an enumerated list that includes e-commerce, e-books, banking services and passenger transport. |
None of that is legal advice. Where it matters we will say so plainly and point you to somebody who gives it.
The expensive mistake here is not buying badly. It is buying the neighbour. Somebody who needed the dated document and bought the built-in engagement has paid for real work. It was done properly, by people who knew what they were doing. The product is better for it. The questionnaire on their desk still has nothing written on it, and the date on it has not moved.
That order binds one company on its own marketing claims. What the complaint cites is the part you can use. A script cannot tell you where you stand. Anything you send out has to have been checked by a person.
Every one of these five already says out loud who it is not for. You can check that before you contact anybody.
The conformance page sends people off this whole section. Say what landed on your desk is a security questionnaire rather than an accessibility one. The words on the desk look identical, and the purchase is not here at all. It points at security and compliance work instead.
The two accessibility pages send people to each other, in both directions. Not built yet goes one way. A live product that needs an evidence pack goes the other. Neither one tries to keep somebody the other serves better.
And the limit gets named against us in the same breath as the work. There is no certification for VPAT, and the Information Technology Industry Council, which publishes the template, says so itself. We build for the audits and we do not own the certifications. All of that wording is live right now on the five routes named above. Open any of them and check how each one describes the work it turns down, before you send us anything.
If this is your situation
You want somebody to hold the level over the following year rather than reach it once.
What that costs you
Reaching a standard and keeping it are separate arrangements. None of these five is the one that keeps it.
If this is your situation
What to build is not settled yet, and the argument in the room is about the product rather than the interface.
What that costs you
Interface work will make that argument prettier without ending it.
Keep your money
If this is your situation
You have one surface, one team and no second platform on the horizon.
What that costs you
A shared token file and a component folder will hold for another year. Governance becomes the problem at three surfaces, once somebody has to referee them.
Match the tell, not the service name. A live product with drop-out data and a flow you can name goes to interface and flow work. A technical doubt ahead of the first build goes to prototyping. Many surfaces that have to stay consistent go to design systems. Not built yet, or a change to how the building happens, goes to accessibility built in. Somebody outside the company reading the output goes to conformance evidence.
If two tells match, the thing sitting on your desk decides. Whatever has a date on it and a name attached to it is the one you buy first. The other one is still there afterwards.
And the work may not sit under design at all. Build and launch covers taking something new to production. Scale and optimize covers a live product under load. Responsible and future-proof covers ownership, data and run cost. All four sit under how we work with companies.